<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (8) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235968</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on excise duty paid on welding electrodes was held admissible because the issue had already been settled by earlier Tribunal and High Court decisions treating such electrodes as eligible inputs. Applying that binding precedent, the claim was accepted on the same footing and the credit could not be denied merely on the ground that welding electrodes were not admissible inputs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198378" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235968</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on excise duty paid on welding electrodes was held admissible because the issue had already been settled by earlier Tribunal and High Court decisions treating such electrodes as eligible inputs. Applying that binding precedent, the claim was accepted on the same footing and the credit could not be denied merely on the ground that welding electrodes were not admissible inputs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235968</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>